Oviatt talks about Fremont Valley project at Ridgecrest council meeting

Saturday

Dec 21, 2013 at 10:00 AM

A packed room filled the Ridgecrest Council Chamber on Wednesday night as Kern County’s planning chief presented an overview of a controversial project in a neighboring valley.

By Jack BarnwellCITY EDITORjbarnwell@ridgecrestca.com

A packed room filled the Ridgecrest Council Chamber on Wednesday night as Kern County’s planning chief presented an overview of a controversial project in a neighboring valley.Lorelei Oviatt, Kern County’s Planning Department Director, detailed the Fremont Valley Preservation Project, a proposed 4,806-acre combined solar, water banking and water extraction plan located near Cantil and Randsburg. The project’s parent company is AquaHelio LLC.From the start, Oviatt stressed that her purpose at the council meeting was to provide a presentation, not a question-and-answer session on the project.“The appropriate venue for that is Kern County planning commission and the Board of Supervisors,” Oviatt said. She said any information not already available to the public or not known would not be provided. Oviatt said that the project is situated on private land acquired by AquaHelio, located from southeast corner of Highway 14, and 13 miles south of Ridgecrest at its northern point.The project proposes a massive number of solar panels that will generate 1,008 megawatts of power, banking of 220,000 acre-feet of water per year, and water extraction of up to 114,000 acre-feet of water per year.Oviatt said the project required a Environmental Impact Report process, which remains in draft form until the planning commission and ultimately the Board of Supervisors certifies it. With its appendixes, the draft EIR is more than 7,000 pages long. The EIR process is required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).“The applicant pays for a environmental consultant but never speaks to that consultant,” Oviatt said. “All of the work is done through staff and the mitigation standards are not excepted by the applicant.”She said that any and all environmental mitigation requirements are mandatory.“They are fully enforceable under the California Environmental Quality Act and are further enforceable by a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that we require on all of our wind and solar projects,” Oviatt said.The MOU is the catch-all, Oviatt said. Even if the board of supervisors approved the project, until AquaHelio signed the dotted line, it would not go into effect. The standards also apply to all future owners of the 30-year project, whether they private owners or public agencies.She added a second MOU, still to be drafted but mentioned in the EIR, states AquaHelio will pay for the water extraction based on acre-feet, and that Kern County will maintain control of 10 percent of the water extracted from the Fremont Valley ground basin.“It will be for the Board of Supervisors to use for the advantage of Kern County businesses,” Oviatt said. “We have many situations such as Keene, which is being held hostage by the railroad because the railroad provides water to them … It’s up to $5,000 a month because there’s no water in Keene.”The water under the Board of Supervisors’ authority will be used for the benefit of all Kern County, not just the eastern portion.“It can be transferred to any part of Kern County, it just can’t leave it,” Oviatt said. She stressed that this second MOU has been offered by the applicant, not a county requirement. Native water concernsWater extraction remains the crux of the concern over the project. With a proposed 114,000 acre-feet per year, up to 1 million acre-feet total, many residents in the immediate area of the project have voiced their concerns.One concern is the impact to the Indian Wells Valley basin.The EIR has shown no connection between the Indian Wells Valley basin and the Fremont Valley basin,” Oviatt said. “No hydrologist has submitted technical information that changes that conclusion.”Oviatt said that the EIR states 114,000 acre-feet (39 billion gallons) is the maximum amount to be extracted annually. She added no information has been submitted that changes the assessment that 7 million acre feet of water at a depth of 600 feet remains in the basin. Oviatt said because the EIR names Kern County as the lead agency, under CEQA, mitigations can be imposed on how water extraction is handled. Additionally, the county MOU binds the Fremont Valley project owners contractually. She stressed it does not apply to water banking, a different component of the project.All the safeguards and provisions allow that water extracted from the Fremont Valley basin will not leave Kern County. For the applicant to change its mind would require the addition of a conditional use permit and a new EIR to be circulated.“The reason that they have not done this is because I’ve indicated I would not recommend approval of such a CUP to the planning commission and the board,” Oviatt said. She added there were plenty of business opportunities within Kern County for water sales.Oviatt stressed that the concerns of the local area will be taken into account. She added that 114,000 acre-feet of extraction was more than a safe yield for the Fremont Valley basin. If pumped at that rate every year, it would exceed the 1 million acre-feet mark in less than nine years.After all the calculations are done, she said that the EIR assumes a recharge rate of 10,500 acre-feet per year. As a mitigation, before water can be extracted, a committee must review the situation and recommend an amount for extraction.Council comments, questionsCouncilman Steven Morgan dropped the first comment, mentioning that he and Vice Mayor Chip Holloway had spoken with AquaHelio representatives.“For two hours we went through all the questions we received from the comments made on the EIR,” Morgan said. “What I learned today was that even though Lorelei has greatly defined the process of what this project will be, there are a lot more eyes on it.”Those “eyes” include the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board, which oversees water concerns in areas including Eastern Kern County, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife.“In learning that the Department of Fish and Wildlife has already been out there and they don’t have any critter concerns, that surprised me because they never say that,” Morgan said.Councilwoman Lori Acton, who has long been a strong opponent of the project, said that the presentation has dispelled a lot of misinformation going out, including that presented by herself.Councilman Jim Sanders touched on subsidence, or the collapsing of the ground if too much water is extracted.“What is the risk of subsidence and is there a plan if it happens,” he asked.Oviatt said subsidence is a problem all over Kern County. “We will monitor it, and if it’s on the applicant’s property, it’s their risk,” she said. “The important thing is that it’s not off the property.”Holloway, the vice mayor, said that based on the meeting with AquaHelio, there should be a “trust-but-verify” approach to any information on the Fremont Valley Project.“I think for the public’s sake, the amount of money invested in this project to this point, to verify the amount of water at 600 feet is $18 million,” Holloway said. “The amount to invested to look at levels between 600 to 10,000 feet is only $500,000 … the applicants put that in there in an effort to be more transparent. … the basis is on the first 600 feet.”Holloway said if the numbers play out and there is an indication that more water exists below 600 feet (and can be used), then it may turn from a negatively-portrayed project to a positive one.“There some potentially positive impacts to this project,” Holloway said. “As a community we need to base our informational facts, and some of the facts I have received (before) do not jibe with the statements I received from AquaHelio.”